If I beat you in the face once, you're going to be pissed off, maybe scared, maybe shocked. If I do it thirty times and you can't stop me, the experience will be different than just the one time. If I beat you at least once a day, the experience will be different still.

Having it happen so often means you can't leave the house without wondering if and when it will happen that day. Having it happen once leaves you free to live your life.

And while talking to a creeper or potential rapist can happen for men, they don't have to think of it for most (if not all) the conversations they will ever have in public with strangers.

If I beat you in the face once, you're going to be pissed off, maybe scared, maybe shocked. If I do it thirty times and you can't stop me, the experience will be different than just the one time. If I beat you at least once a day, the experience will be different still.

Having it happen so often means you can't leave the house without wondering if and when it will happen that day. Having it happen once leaves you free to live your life.

And while talking to a creeper or potential rapist can happen for men, they don't have to think of it for most (if not all) the conversations they will ever have in public with strangers.

I accept that it's far more likely to happen to the same woman repeatedly than to the same man, it's perfectly valid.

I apologise because I missed something in your original-long-post. You covered man-randomly-approaching-woman and woman-randomly-approaching woman, while I though you did man-woman and woman-man.

However, all possible gender-gender combinations can lead to potential problems. It is correct that women 'have/are_more_likely to live with the constant fear of it due to statistical reasons'. But your personal-and-totally-justified-emotional-luggage don't define the concept of 'being approached by a stranger'. The situation stands alone as a social phenomenon, regardless of how you feel about it due to past/possible_future events.

Being approached by strangers is a part of the social ape commnunity that is both necessary for its expansion and potentially dangerous for its members and that's something that people of all genders should accept (unless they become hermits) and also learn to defend from, regardless of what gender is statistically more likely to face it and its negative aspects.

The act of calling the behavior out for its inappropriate nature and forcing people to deal with their assumptions of what liberties they're allowed to take with their "fellow apes" IS "dealing with it". Dudebros just don't like that people aren't dealing with it in a way that allows them to continue being creepy assholes._________________

What you do with your legs, neck, throat, eyes, face, mouth is yours and yours alone to decide so long you don't use them to enter private property or to physcally interact with someone without their consent. No matter how annoying it is you can't demand from a stranger to 'not stare at you' or to 'not have approached you because you didn't feel like it'.

Also, being called a creep will hardly discourage a genuine stalker/assaulter/rapist/whatever.

And since the phenomenon can occur with both man and woman culprits, I don't think that using the term 'dudebro', which last time I checked had man-only-applications, to describe the potential creeps is totally efficient.

My point simply was that what the situtation of actually being faced with a potential (or actual) creep/stalker/rapist/annoying_person_who_approaches_you_repeatedly means to you and how you should act about it, is the same, regardless of being a man or a woman.

but it's not, for precisely the reason you said you understand and agree with. otherwise there wouldn't be that vast discrepancy in statistics or those differing cultural scripts.

I accept that it's far more likely to happen to the same woman repeatedly than to the same man, it's perfectly valid.

You should have left it there.

geareye wrote:

I apologise because I missed something in your original-long-post. You covered man-randomly-approaching-woman and woman-randomly-approaching woman, while I though you did man-woman and woman-man.

Use quotes instead of dashes.

geareye wrote:

However, all possible gender-gender combinations can lead to potential problems.

This is not a valid argument and has little to nothing to do with the conversation.

geareye wrote:

It is correct that women 'have/are_more_likely to live with the constant fear of it due to statistical reasons'.

Yes it is.

geareye wrote:

But your personal-and-totally-justified-emotional-luggage don't define the concept of 'being approached by a stranger'.

The term is 'emotional baggage'. And this statement makes no sense. It sounds like babbling. 'Don't define the concept of being approached by a stranger'? I'm talking about a thing that happens in real life. 'Patriarchy' is a concept. 'Nice guy' is a concept. 'Being approached by a stranger' is an event.

geareye wrote:

The situation stands alone as a social phenomenon, regardless of how you feel about it due to past/possible_future events.

It is systemic, and it does not stand alone. It is also part of a larger problem.

geareye wrote:

Being approached by strangers is a part of the social ape commnunity that is both necessary for its expansion and potentially dangerous for its members and that's something that people of all genders should accept (unless they become hermits) and also learn to defend from, regardless of what gender is statistically more likely to face it and its negative aspects.

In other words, women should accept being raped, abused, killed, etc, for the good of the species.

What you do with your legs, neck, throat, eyes, face, mouth is yours and yours alone to decide so long you don't use them to enter private property or to physcally interact with someone without their consent. No matter how annoying it is you can't demand from a stranger to 'not stare at you' or to 'not have approached you because you didn't feel like it'.

Also, being called a creep will hardly discourage a genuine stalker/assaulter/rapist/whatever.

And since the phenomenon can occur with both man and woman culprits, I don't think that using the term 'dudebro', which last time I checked had man-only-applications, to describe the potential creeps is totally efficient.

I wrote a monologue for you. Memorize it and recite it for women you meet on the street.

"Omg I think any woman should have to talk to me whether she wants to or not because I want her to and we're both great apes anyway and she should just do it. It's for the greater good of the species, and the conversation will be just as good if she detests and loathes me utterly, and mebbe I'll get sex out of the deal. Good times! All about me! All of it! Frequency and systemic problems have nothing on my desire to further evolution.

Fuck her opinion, she's got no right or reason to assert that she doesn't like people bothering her, and no one who knows this is a frequent problem has any right to point it out or argue about it to anyone, even on the internets, because we all have to get along quietly and let the sexual harassment go on unabated.

Just sit there and be afraid of or annoyed at me, woman. I'm trying to have a conversation, take your damn headphones out of your ears and put your book down!"

Letting the community at large know what behavior is creepy deters most people from practicing it. Shame, guilt and mockery are part of the human set of social tools that keep everyone in line.

And you may think it is inappropriate, but you think harassment is just fine and dandy and women should shut up and take it, so your opinion is irrelevant.

What you do with your legs, neck, throat, eyes, face, mouth is yours and yours alone to decide so long you don't use them to enter private property or to physcally interact with someone without their consent. No matter how annoying it is you can't demand from a stranger to 'not stare at you' or to 'not have approached you because you didn't feel like it'.

Also, being called a creep will hardly discourage a genuine stalker/assaulter/rapist/whatever.

And since the phenomenon can occur with both man and woman culprits, I don't think that using the term 'dudebro', which last time I checked had man-only-applications, to describe the potential creeps is totally efficient.

I wrote a monologue for you. Memorize it and recite it for women you meet on the street.

"Omg I think any woman should have to talk to me whether she wants to or not because I want her to and we're both great apes anyway and she should just do it. It's for the greater good of the species, and the conversation will be just as good if she detests and loathes me utterly, and mebbe I'll get sex out of the deal. Good times! All about me! All of it! Frequency and systemic problems have nothing on my desire to further evolution.

Fuck her opinion, she's got no right or reason to assert that she doesn't like people bothering her, and no one who knows this is a frequent problem has any right to point it out or argue about it to anyone, even on the internets, because we all have to get along quietly and let the sexual harassment go on unabated.

Just sit there and be afraid of or annoyed at me, woman. I'm trying to have a conversation, take your damn headphones out of your ears and put your book down!"

Letting the community at large know what behavior is creepy deters most people from practicing it. Shame, guilt and mockery are part of the human set of social tools that keep everyone in line.

And you may think it is inappropriate, but you think harassment is just fine and dandy and women should shut up and take it, so your opinion is irrelevant.

As I am new here and haven't got the hang of the quoting mechanism I'll refrain from it. The following is in referance to stripey's quoting on me:

That there are dangers in all gender-gender interactions and that they can all lead to potential creep/rapist situations is a fact and I stand by it. And it is part of our discussion because a large part of this discussion now is whether or not such situations are specifically a problem that only women face. (hint: It isN't)

If you think it sounded like blabbing, I suggest you clear your ears.
'Patriarchy' is both a concept and a social phenomenon. (which as you obviously saw, I mentioned in my next line which you quoted) So is the 'nice guy'. So is 'being approached by a stranger'.

A concept is a theoritcal description of either an idea, or an actual phenomenon. Don't 'nice guys' exist in real life? Don't they multiply by media and other influences? Yes and yes. They are a both a social phenomenon and a concept. The same goes for 'being approached by a stranger'.

On 'in other words...of the species':
A) What part of 'learn to defend from it', which I said, didn't you get?
B) I already said that a couple of posts above this that 'you are free to do what you want with your own body unless you enter private property or physcally interact with someone who doesn't want to'. Again, what isn't clear?
C) Being harassed/abused/raped isn't a woman's problem only!!

Everything that happens in our society is part of it and since our society is obviously problematic in a lot of ways, everything is 'part of the larger problem'. That doesn't mean that something 'can't stand alone.'

An analogy would be media and press. They stand alone as a concept. Are they used negatively in our world? Yes. But they are not harmful by default, only by application.
Same goes for 'being approached by strangers'. It's not NECESSARILY harmful. Also, it is inevitable between social creatures.

As for the 'gorilla' argument, which I'm guessing you brought up to show that humans, unlike other apes can adapt and influence their society/nature, I disagree. I don't have the data on the evolutionary history of humans to be certain why it is that humans have larger penises and if it happened due to females choosing them or for some other biological reasons. And on a more brain-teasery note...even if they did choose it...what makes you think they had a choice on whether or not to choose it? And I don't mean that they were coerced into this choice, I mean that what we choose is based on what we want and what we want isn't always (or at all, but that's part of another discussion) our choice.

What you do with your legs, neck, throat, eyes, face, mouth is yours and yours alone to decide so long you don't use them to enter private property or to physcally interact with someone without their consent. No matter how annoying it is you can't demand from a stranger to 'not stare at you' or to 'not have approached you because you didn't feel like it'.

Also, being called a creep will hardly discourage a genuine stalker/assaulter/rapist/whatever.

And since the phenomenon can occur with both man and woman culprits, I don't think that using the term 'dudebro', which last time I checked had man-only-applications, to describe the potential creeps is totally efficient.

I wrote a monologue for you. Memorize it and recite it for women you meet on the street.

"Omg I think any woman should have to talk to me whether she wants to or not because I want her to and we're both great apes anyway and she should just do it. It's for the greater good of the species, and the conversation will be just as good if she detests and loathes me utterly, and mebbe I'll get sex out of the deal. Good times! All about me! All of it! Frequency and systemic problems have nothing on my desire to further evolution.

Fuck her opinion, she's got no right or reason to assert that she doesn't like people bothering her, and no one who knows this is a frequent problem has any right to point it out or argue about it to anyone, even on the internets, because we all have to get along quietly and let the sexual harassment go on unabated.

Just sit there and be afraid of or annoyed at me, woman. I'm trying to have a conversation, take your damn headphones out of your ears and put your book down!"

Letting the community at large know what behavior is creepy deters most people from practicing it. Shame, guilt and mockery are part of the human set of social tools that keep everyone in line.

And you may think it is inappropriate, but you think harassment is just fine and dandy and women should shut up and take it, so your opinion is irrelevant.

I explained why it's pointless to see it as a man-woman condition only, so I'll just use absuer-absued and talking-listening.

Anyone can talk to you whether you want it or not. Their throat and mouth, their rules. You don't have to respond. You don't have to take off your headphones, look at them, acknowledge their existence, whatever. You don't. And I already said that while you can talk all you want, phsycial interaction (like sex) require mutual consent. I stated that clearly. How on earth do you go from that to 'should sleep for me rgardless of whether he/she wants it , because it's for the good of the species'??

And when I say repeatedly that since we live in a world filled with unwanted interaction, we should learn to defend from it, how can you conclude that I say that harassment is fine?

Perhaps you could state that we two draw the line of what counts as harassment-through-talking on a differerent spot. I think that being approached once or even twice is ok and so long as it doesn't turn into verbal abuse, you think that being approached without wishing the upcoming attention is harassment. That's it. That's our difference.